January 27, 2005

BAM. It finally makes sense.

So despite everything I've said in the past, I've not really given up the idea of somehow extracting better, shallower dept-of-field from the XL2. The problem has been that the optical science has been basically going over my head for quite a bit, despite John's valiant efforts to educate my dumb ass. Well, thanks to his instruction and prodigious reading, I finally got it.

Side Note: John was somewhat surprised at the low level of knowledge that I possess in the area of cameras and optics. He painstakingly answered my questions and for that, I am eternally grateful. This was a change from our usual roles, where John's usually picking my brain for computer advice, and he mentioned this role-reversal during our last encounter. I hadn't realized it, but John thought that I had a very low opinion of his intellect, which is simply not true. John, if you're reading this, I've never had a low opinion of your intellect, and I'm sorry I ever gave you the impression that I did. I have nothing but respect for your mental abilities and if anything, I'm in awe of the depth of knowledge that you possess in the field of cameras, optics and flying. Yes, flying - the FAA ground-school stuff is still so much gobledy-gook to me.

Getting back to bidness:

The whole DOF issue is one that's been bothering me for some time. Experimentation with the XL2 yielded some decent results; however, these setups required really long distances and a zoom in to at least half the lens' range. Not very useful for indoor stuff.

So the alternative was a P+S Technik Mini35 adapter, for a grand total of... $10,000 or more. Chris, got your checkbook?

I didn't think so.

Well, the nice thing about this stuff is that the proliferation of 24P cameras with 16X9 3-CCD chips has given a massive boost to DV-based indie filmmaking. As a result, more and more people are pushing to get "the film look" and as such, achieving a 35mm-esque DOF has become something of a 'movement'.

Thanks to this movement, I finally understand - it's not so much about the lenses - though those are important to get a proper image onto the target - but about the target itself. The 1/3" CCD's on an XL2 just aren't big enough.

So we need to project the image coming in through a 35MM lens onto a piece of ground glass, which is then captured by the lens operating in Macro Mode. Given that the 20X Flourite on the XL2 was able to focus on dust specs on the lens itself, I have no doubt it's up to the job.

The ground glass is a challenge, but there are some good companies that I can go to for that. The whole thing shouldn't be too expensive either - low three figures is what I'm surmising from all the people who seem to have made a hobby out of this.

Of course, how this is gonna work on a home-built steadycam rig, I have NO idea...